cruise missles: who uses them?

[D0NIMATRIX]

-This is a rather ridiculous tactic.

No kidding.

 

[Snarkhunter]

No kidding.

O, I dunno. Sort of the CivIII equivalent of shock and awe. . . .

kk

 

[stalin83]

Hmm perhaps CMs could be used as a counter-offensive weapon by a weaker nations against a larger (yet largely conscript) land invasion.Their high bombard value makes them a more efficent choice than bombers for blunting an enemy invasion. any thoughts?

 

[D0NIMATRIX]

Sounds good, plus you can have a new batch every turn or so.

 

[rysmiel]

O, I dunno. Sort of the CivIII equivalent of shock and awe. . . .

I think that's the most Civ 2-like thing I've yet seen done in Civ 3.

 

[Gosnork]

Hmm perhaps CMs could be used as a counter-offensive weapon by a weaker nations against a larger (yet largely conscript) land invasion.Their high bombard value makes them a more efficent choice than bombers for blunting an enemy invasion. any thoughts?

No, bombers are more effective on the defensive. CMs should only be used to take cities, as they target units 1st, while bombers have a 1 in 3 chance. However on non city tiles bombers target units first, so the main advantage CMs have is lost. Bombers also have to rebase, so they can only hit enemy cities within 12 tiles of their position at the start of war, while CMs can be moved up as the frontlines move, as shown in my example.